

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Today on the banks of the Androscoggin, once labeled the most polluted river in America, a diverse group of Mainers described the importance of the Clean Water Act. The Act became law on October 18, 1972, when Congress voted to override President Nixon's veto of the bill. This landmark law was a crowning accomplishment for Maine U.S. Senator Edmund Muskie, who grew up in Rumford and was riled into action because our rivers were being treated as open sewers. His determination to act resulted in one of the nation's most important environmental laws.
"Senator Muskie's leadership put the nation on a path that brought life back to dead waterways, protected human health, increased recreation opportunities, expanded economic opportunities in riverside communities, improved real-estate property values, and contributed to the quality of life of millions of Americans nationwide. For that, we are enormously grateful," said NRCM Executive Director Lisa Pohlmann.
Before the Clean Water Act, Maine had no sewage treatment plants. The stench along our polluted waterways depressed real estate values and left retail stores in communities near polluted waters deserted in the summer months. The sulfite-laden air blackened silver products in jewelry stores. The toxic fumes peeled paint off buildings, while the odors, which were noticed 20 miles from the river, sickened people. And when the weather was hot, dissolved oxygen in the river plummeted, killing essentially all fish and wildlife in the Androscoggin, as well as the Kennebec and Penobscot.
"We have come an enormous way since the Clean Water Act became law. Today is a day for celebrating that progress, acknowledging the vital role that Senator Muskie and the state of Maine played in passing the Clean Water Act, and focusing on the threats to clean water that require continued leadership from Maine's elected officials," added Pohlmann.
Bates College Chemistry Professor Walter Lawrence played a significant role in helping Senator Muskie and state leaders understand how polluted our rivers had become. Lawrence produced detailed reports based on daily water samples from hundreds of sampling stations along the Androscoggin. Through the 1960s, Maine's industrial rivers were classified as Class D, described in state regulations as: "primarily for use in transportation of wastes."
Although the U.S. House and Senate voted nearly unanimously in 1972 for the Clean Water Act, President Nixon vetoed the bill on October 17, 1972. Veto override votes by the Senate and House occurred on October 17 and 18, 1972, respectively. The Senate voted 52-12 to override, with 36 Senators not voting. The House voted 247-23 to override, and the bill became law.
The Androscoggin and other Maine rivers and lakes are cleaner today than they were 40 years ago thanks to the Clean Water Act, which gave the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to force polluting industries and towns to treat waste and sewage before discharging it.
Now, these basic safeguards and other federal laws that protect Maine waters are under attack. Here are a few examples; see attached document for more:
"We urge Senators Collins and King to continue to support strong federal clean water protections, including full funding of the Environmental Protection Agency," said Pohlmann. "Clean, healthy waterways are vital to our day-to-day lives in Maine. They help ensure safe drinking water, suitable habitat for fish and other wildlife, and recreational opportunities that make Maine a special place in which to live, work, play, and visit."
For more information about the threats facing Maine's clean water, see the attached document.
Dick Anderson, a young fisheries biologist for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in the 1960s, today recalls how polluted the Androscoggin had become. "We paddled the Androscoggin from the New Hampshire border to Brunswick, and it was a revolting task. Every bit of waste and sewage was dumped into the river. At least seven paper mills were dumping untreated waste into the river, as were tanneries and towns. We traveled through this disgusting mess, and look at it now! We can feel proud today on the 45th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, written and championed by our great Maine Senator, Edmund Muskie."
Rebecca Swanson Conrad, President and CEO of the Lewiston-Auburn Metro Chamber of Commerce, today described how important the revitalized, cleaner Androscoggin River is for both Lewiston and Auburn. "I marvel at how far we have come over the past 50 years. Look at the investments we've made in the Bates Mill, Auburn Riverwalk, and the businesses, hotels, and homes along this majestic river. In the 1960s, we were not considering the environmental impact of the river on our future economy. The Androscoggin was dead, but it has come back to life in no small part because of Senator Muskie and the Clean Water Act. And with that recovery, Lewiston and Auburn have made the river central to our economic future. We are so thankful for the many people, organizations, and elected leaders who helped deliver the great progress that we have seen. It stands as a testament to how important a clean environment is to a healthy economy."
Lynne Lewis, Elmer W. Campbell Professor of Economics at Bates College, today spoke about the economic benefits that clean water provides to Maine. "The Clean Water Act provides billions of dollars in economic benefits annually, by protecting water that we drink, live near, and fish and play in. For a state like Maine that is literally filled with rivers, lakes, streams, and coastline, clean water provides enormous economic value to our state in the form of reduced health care costs, improved recreational opportunities and tourism, property values, and tax revenues to the state. From my research and that of others, it is clear that clean water significantly increases waterfront property values for both homeowners and businesses. Thriving businesses and community events take place along rivers such as this. These revenue sources did not exist before the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act has resulted in a rebounding of river herring and other sea-run fish, contributing to the health of our Gulf of Maine fisheries. Our lakes contribute an estimated $3.5 billion to Maine's economy annually, supporting 52,000 jobs, and clean coastal waters support the thousands of lobstering and fishing jobs that deliver landings of more than $700 million annually."
Natalie Lounsbury, who grew up in Auburn, recalls attending meetings with her mother, Bonnie, where the discussions focused on "color, odor, and foam." Natalie and Bonnie now have a farm along the Androscoggin in Turner and Natalie is also a PhD student in natural resources at the University of New Hampshire. Today Natalie said, "Nearly all water that reaches rivers passes through or over soil. As we celebrate the 45th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, and as we continue our efforts to protect Maine's waters, it's important to support land managers and farmers in implementing practices like cover crops and riparian buffers that help keep our waters clean."
The Natural Resources Council of Maine is the leading nonprofit membership organization working statewide for clean air and water; healthy people, wildlife and forests; and clean energy solutions. NRCM harnesses the power of science, the law, and the voices of more than 12,000 supporters to protect the nature of Maine. Visit NRCM online at www.nrcm.org.
"We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity," said Rep. Nydia Velázquez, introducing the New Good Neighbor Act with Rep. Delia Ramirez.
With the death toll from President Donald Trump's boat bombings of alleged drug traffickers now at 130 after a Monday strike, a pair of progressive congresswomen on Tuesday called for ending the Monroe Doctrine and establishing a "New Good Neighbor" policy toward Latin America and the Caribbean.
In 1823, then-President James Monroe "declared the Western Hemisphere off limits to powerful countries in Europe," NPR noted last month. "Fast forward, and President Trump is reviving the Monroe Doctrine to justify intervening in places like Venezuela, and threatening further action in other parts of Latin America and Greenland."
Trump's version of the policy has been dubbed the "Donroe Doctrine." After US forces boarded the Aquila II, a Venezuela-linked oil tanker, in the Indian Ocean, David Adler, co-general coordinator of Progressive International, said Monday that "the Donroe Doctrine is not simply a vision for the hemisphere. It is a doctrine of global domination."
In response to the president's recent actions—from his boat bombings and pardon of convicted drug trafficker and former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, to his oil blockade of Venezuela and raid that overthrew the South American country's president, Nicolás Maduro—US Reps. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) introduced the New Good Neighbor Act.
"This administration's aggressive stance toward Latin America makes this resolution critical," said Velázquez in a statement. "Their 'Donroe Doctrine' is simply a more grotesque version of the interventionist policies that have failed us for two centuries."
"The United States and Latin America face shared challenges in drug trafficking, migration, and climate change," she continued. "We can only solve these through real partnership, not coercion. We need to finally leave the Monroe Doctrine behind and pursue a foreign policy grounded in mutual respect and shared prosperity."
Ramirez similarly said that "for more than 200 years, the United States has used the Monroe Doctrine to justify a paternalistic, damaging approach to relations with Latin America and the Caribbean. As a result, the legacy of our nation's foreign policy in those regions is political instability, deep poverty, extreme migration, and colonialism. It is well past time we change our approach."
"We must recognize our interconnectedness and admit that the Monroe Doctrine undermines the partnership needed to confront the complex challenges of this century," she argued. "We must become better neighbors. That is why I am proud to join Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez to develop an approach to foreign policy that advances our collective interests and builds a stronger coalition throughout the Americas and the rest of the world."
The original Good Neighbor Policy was adopted by former President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, in an attempt at reverse US imperialism in Latin America. The aim was to curb military interventions, center respect for national sovereignty, and prioritize diplomacy and trade.
As the sponsors' offices summarized, the new resolution calls for:
The measure isn't likely to advance in a Republican-controlled Congress that has failed to pass various war powers resolutions that would rein in Trump's boat strikes and aggression toward Venezuela, but it offers Democrats an opportunity to make their foreign policy positions clear going into the midterms—in which Velázquez, who is 72, has decided not to seek reelection.
So far, it is backed by Democratic Reps. Greg Casar (Texas), Yvette Clarke (NY), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Sylvia García (Texas), Adelita Grijalva (Ariz.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Jonathan Jackson (Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Lateefah Simon (Calif.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). Like Velázquez, Chuy García and Schakowsky are also retiring after this term.
Leaders from organizations including the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), the United Methodist Church's board, and We Are CASA also backed the bill and commended the sponsors for, as Cavan Kharrazian of Demand Progress, put it "advancing a new framework for US engagement in the region grounded in mutual respect, sovereignty, and cooperation rather than coercion or threats."
Alex Main, CEPR's director of international policy, stressed that "Trump is waging a new offensive against Latin America and the Caribbean—conducting illegal and unprovoked military attacks and extrajudicial killings and brazenly intervening in other countries' domestic affairs in an undisguised effort to exert control over the region's resources and politics."
"But while Trump’s actions are especially egregious, they are just the latest chapter of a centuries-old story of US military political and economic interference that has subverted democracy and fueled instability and human rights crimes across the hemisphere," Main continued. "It is in the interest of the US to reject this doctrine of unilateral domination and chart a new course for US-Latin American relations—to treat our Latin American siblings as vecinos, not vassals."
Sharing yet another brief black-and-white video on social media, US Southern Command on Monday announced a "lethal kinetic strike on a vessel" allegedly "transiting along known narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific." SOUTHCOM added that "two narco-terrorists were killed and one survived the strike," which prompted a search for the survivor.
Legal experts and various members of Congress have described the killings as murder on the high seas. Reiterating that position in response to the latest bombing disclosure, Amnesty International USA urged Americans to pressure lawmakers to act.
"US military helpfully publishes evidence of its mass murder of civilians at sea," said Ben Saul, a professor at Australia's University of Sydney and the United Nations special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. "Over to you, US Department of Justice, to do your job and bring murder suspects to justice."
Jews for Racial and Economic Justice lauded Lander's "long record as a progressive champion and his commitment to ending US complicity in the genocide in Gaza."
A leading progressive US Jewish group on Tuesday endorsed former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander for Congress over incumbent Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman, citing the former's support for a bill that would block the sale of many offensive weapons to Israel amid the ongoing Gaza genocide.
Jews for Racial and Economic Justice (JFREJ) said in a statement that it is endorsing Lander for New York's 10th Congressional District seat in June's Democratic primary due to "his long record as a progressive champion and his commitment to ending US complicity in the genocide in Gaza."
JFREJ specifically cited Lander's recent endorsement of the HR 3565, the Block the Bombs Act, legislation introduced last year by Reps. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.).
The Jewish Vote proudly endorses @bradlander.bsky.social for U.S. Congress in NY10! He’s been a member of JFREJ for decades & we know Brad will bring this courage to Congress, where he’ll join the fight against fascism, oligarchy, and genocide.
[image or embed]
— Jews For Racial & Economic Justice Action (@jfrejnyc.bsky.social) February 10, 2026 at 6:42 AM
Backed by the Congressional Progressive Caucus, the bill would prohibit the sale of weapons like BLU-109 “bunker buster” bombs, MK-80 series bombs, Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), 120 mm tank rounds, and 155 mm artillery shells to Israel, whose 28-month assault and siege on Gaza have left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead, wounded, or missing, according to Gaza officials.
Goldman does not support the bill. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was by far the largest single contributor to his campaign coffers during the last election cycle and, along with other pro-Israel lobby groups, has given nearly half a million dollars to his campaigns, according to AIPAC Tracker. There is no record of Lander ever taking AIPAC cash.
Billions of dollars worth of US-supplied weapons have played a critical role in Israel’s war and have been used in some of the deadliest Israel Defense Forces massacres of Palestinians.
United Nations experts, human rights groups, and others including the numerous nations backing South Africa's genocide case against Israel currently before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) contend that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
Lander acknowledges the Gaza genocide. Goldman does not. Goldman was also one of 22 House Democrats who voted in favor of a Republican-led resolution to censure Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), the only Palestinian American in Congress, for supporting Palestinian liberation "from the river to the sea."
Goldman told the New York Times last month that had the vote come up more recently, he "would look at it a very different way, and most likely vote differently."
Lander has said he would not have voted to censure Tlaib had he been serving in the House at the time of the vote.
“Brad Lander has been a progressive champion for years, and we are thrilled to endorse him for Congress representing NY-10,” said JFREJ executive director Audrey Sasson said Tuesday. “NY-10 constituents’ calls to end US complicity in Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza have gone unanswered for so long."
"The district deserves a representative who will use the tools of government to fight the war machine, abolish ICE, and work to ensure a better future for all of us," Sasson added, referring to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "Brad Lander will be that representative, because he understands that the purpose of government is to serve the people, and he’s a public servant through and through."
Responding to the JFREJ endorsement, Lander said Tuesday that “I’ve been organizing with Jews for Racial and Economic Justice for three decades—and there’s never been a more urgent time than now."
"To fight the fascist in the White House," he added. "To end US complicity in Israel’s destruction of Gaza. To promote domestic and foreign policy that advances people’s rights, safety, and dignity here in New York City, around the country, in Israel and Palestine, and across the globe.”
Israeli is still killing Palestinians to this day, with more than 1,600 violations of an October ceasefire, according to the Gaza Government Media Office.
"While the world’s attention has turned away, Israel’s bombs are still falling, paid for by US taxpayers," Lander wrote for the Nation Tuesday. "Hunger persists, as aid only trickles in."
“When I am elected to Congress," he added, "I will support the Block the Bombs Act to protect more Palestinians from being killed by Israel.”
"They’d throw out all of us who dissent if they could," warned the Freedom of the Press Foundation's chief of advocacy.
An immigration judge has terminated the Trump administration's effort to deport Rümeysa Öztürk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, for criticizing Israel, her lawyers announced on Monday.
Öztürk, a 30-year-old Turkish national, was snatched off the street by masked US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Massachusetts last March and was flown to an unsanitary detention center in Louisiana, where she spent 45 days before a judge ordered her release on bail.
The US State Department had revoked Öztürk's visa, accusing her of "support for Hamas," a designated terrorist group, and creating a “hostile environment” for Jewish students.
That accusation was based solely on an opinion piece she'd co-written with other Tufts students calling for the university to divest assets from Israel over its genocide in Gaza, which had killed over 50,000 people at the time, according to official figures.
An internal memo relied upon by Secretary of State Marco Rubio provided no evidence that Öztürk had expressed support for terrorist groups or participated in any sort of antisemitic harassment.
Documents unsealed last month by a Massachusetts judge later revealed that Rubio had approved Öztürk and several other students' deportations based solely on their advocacy for Palestinian rights.
It was for this reason that an immigration judge, Roopal Patel, an employee of President Donald Trump's own Department of Justice (DOJ), ultimately found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not met its burden to prove Öztürk’s removability and ordered her case to be dropped.
“Today, I breathe a sigh of relief knowing that despite the justice system’s flaws, my case may give hope to those who have also been wronged by the US government,” Öztürk wrote in a statement Monday. “Though the pain that I and thousands of other women wrongfully imprisoned by ICE have faced cannot be undone, it is heartening to know that some justice can prevail after all.”
Many of the international students who were initially detained by ICE over their advocacy have since been freed after judges ruled their detentions unlawful. But they still spent weeks or months in detention in some cases.
Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts, added that the decision "underscores the importance of allowing federal courts to review challenges to immigration detention" because otherwise "the government could punitively and unlawfully detain any noncitizen for months based solely on their speech so long as it simultaneously began removal proceedings."
Seth Stern, the chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said his organization is "thrilled that the effort to deport Rümeysa Öztürk is over," but that they "remain alarmed and disgusted that it ever happened."
"Öztürk’s case is arguably the most blatant press freedom violation of this century, and maybe the last century as well," he said. "The administration did not even bother to present a pretext for its actions—it arrested her, jailed her in horrific conditions, and sought to expel her solely because she expressed views shared by millions of Americans about one of the most important issues of our time."
Chip Gibbons, policy director of Defending Rights & Dissent, noted that the Trump administration "continues to [Öztürk] as a terrorist," even though "her only 'crime' was using the First Amendment."
Stern said that “they went after noncitizens first, not because they have any greater appreciation of the First Amendment rights of citizens, but because they’re the low-hanging fruit. They’d throw out all of us who dissent if they could.”